2014 Legislative Session: Second Session, 40th Parliament
HANSARD

The following electronic version is for informational purposes only.

The printed version remains the official version.

official report of

Debates of the Legislative Assembly

(hansard)

Tuesday, March 4, 2014

Morning Sitting

Volume 7, Number 3

ISSN 0709-1281 (Print)
ISSN 1499-2175 (Online)

TUESDAY, MARCH 4, 2014

The House met at 10:04 a.m.

[Madame Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers.

[1005]

Introductions by Members

Hon. N. Yamamoto: Today we've got members of the B.C. Fed in the House. We will be meeting with them over the next few days. I'm only going to introduce two of them, because there are many of them here. Jim Sinclair, president of the B.C. Fed, as well as Irene Lanzinger, secretary-treasurer of the B.C. Fed are here, along with many of the officers. They represent approximately 500,000 members from 54 affiliate unions and over 1,100 locals across all sectors of British Columbia.

As I mentioned, the B.C. Federation will be at the Legislature for the next couple of days and will be meeting with the Minister of Jobs, Tourism and Skills Training and many members of our caucus and cabinet, as well as the Premier, tomorrow. Would the House please make them feel welcome.

H. Bains: I also have a number of introductions today. Many of my good friends, my ex-colleagues, are in the gallery. As mentioned earlier Jim Sinclair, president of B.C. Fed, and Irene Lanzinger, from B.C. Fed, are here, along with many of their affiliate representatives.

Val Avery, HSA; David Black, COPE 378; Lee Loftus, B.C. Building Trades; Kari Bepple, BCGEU; Sheryl Burns, CUPE; Nora Butz, UFCW; Walter Gerlach, IAM; Cheryl Ann Gilbert, BCGEU; Glen Hansman, BCTF; Joey Hartman, Vancouver and District Labour Council; Jayne Johns, PSAC; Jason Karpuk, BCTF; Frank Lee, CUPE; Lorene Oikawa, BCGEU; Miriam Olney, BC FORUM; Stephanie Smith, BCGEU; Lorrie Ward, Teamsters 155.

From the film sector, Victor Elkins, HEU; Mark Gordienko, ILWU; Bob Jackson, PSAC; Dusty Kelly, IATSE; Darryl Walker, BCGEU; and Joie Warnock, Unifor. Along with them there is a number of B.C. Fed staff, among them Summer Crosson, Judy Cavanagh, Michael Gardiner and Jim Chorostecki.

I hope I haven't missed anyone. They are here for a couple of days speaking with both sides of the House, trying to bring the issues of the working people. I hope that everyone pays attention, because these are the people that they represent. They produce well. They're the ones who run the economy of this province. Please welcome them all here.

M. Dalton: In the gallery today we have members of the B.C. Association of Optometrists: Surjinder Sahota, from Abbottsford; Brenda Horner, from New West; Trevor Miranda, from Cobble Hill; Cheryl Williams, CEO of the association, from Vancouver; and Murray Hurlbert, who has his office, his practice, right next door to my office in Maple Ridge. It provides a great service in our community. Also, Lloyd Mah, from Coquitlam.

Members from sides had breakfast with them this morning, and they presented their Eye See Eye Care program, which they're introducing in British Columbia. It's a great program. Would the members please make them feel welcome.

M. Elmore: I'd like to also welcome two classes from Sir Charles Tupper Secondary School that are joining us today — grade 11 and grade 12 students. They'll be coming in shortly to listen to question period.

I asked them how they would like me to characterize their school and their class, and they said they'd like to be introduced as the multicultural capital of B.C. I think that is a great characterization.

Also, just an update in terms of the basketball championships. I can report that on Friday the Tupper Tigers successfully won the Lower Mainland championship, so it's a great celebration.

Accompanying the students are teachers Bonnie Burnell, Auton Lum and vice-principal Rutley. As well, they're accompanied by parents Cecelia Baird, Mr. and Mrs. Jang, Sohan Dulai, Don Kramer, Thomas Howell and John Mullan. Please make them welcome.

[1010]

J. Darcy: It's my great pleasure to welcome the B.C. Optometrist Association, as well, and to make a special welcome to Dr. Brenda Horner from New Westminster, who runs a very successful local business, is highly respected in the community, very active in the community. I look forward to having lunch with her soon. She won an auction item that we would have lunch together.

I want to pay a special tribute. The association, as the member opposite has mentioned, is launching a wonderful program providing both free screenings as well as free glasses for kindergarten children. They've got pilot projects going in several communities. We hope to bring it to New Westminster soon. Please make them feel very welcome.

D. Routley: It gives me great pleasure to introduce a dear friend who many in this House know. His name is Peter Kelly. He's a ferries worker. He told me earlier that this is the first time he's visited the Legislature since his high school class visited here. I'm sure not much will have changed in terms of the tone of question period.

He has definitely had an impact on this place since that time. He has been active in all three of my campaigns to
[ Page 1780 ]
sit in this House. He'd been active before that on many other NDP campaigns and therefore has had a direct and very significant impact here. Can the members help me welcome Peter Kelly.

D. Eby: Today in the gallery, two days in a row, we have an association of B.C. students joining us to hear our deliberations during question period. I know they had very productive meetings with my counterpart across the House. Certainly, they had productive discussions with our side of the House as well. I would encourage this House to join me in welcoming these leaders of tomorrow who have joined us here today.

S. Chandra Herbert: I just wanted to welcome Craig Richmond and Tony Gugliotta, from the Vancouver International Airport. We had a very good meeting with them this morning. I just want to say thank you for their work to bring the world to British Columbia and Vancouver.

Statements
(Standing Order 25B)

SOUTH END COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION
IN NANAIMO

D. Routley: I rise to speak to the House about the South End Community Association. The South End of Nanaimo is a very historical community, a very historical neighbourhood. The neighbourhood is dotted with heritage homes, small modest homes of coal miners and forestry workers of the past. It is right adjacent to the Snuneymuxw First Nation, and the community has a wonderful relationship with the Snuneymuxw people.

Residents who live there know that the South End it is a vibrant community with a cornucopia of personalities and talents and the front-porch sense of neighbourhood often missing in newer housing developments. Yes, there is also an extra pinch of creativity added to the mix as well. The South End is a place for people who love living in a community with a real sense of history, people who like to say "good morning" when they walk down their street.

This is a wonderful community, but it has had its troubled years. In response to those troubles, this wonderful community association was formed. President Douglas Hardie, Vice-President Chris LoScerbo, Treasurer Sandra Laroque, Joan Carruthers, Sandy Mclellan, Starr Faux, David Scott, Lisa Martin, Gord Fuller, Michael Carpenter and Kathryn Hazel all involve themselves very deeply in the community.

They liaison with the RCMP to keep the community safe. They involve themselves in every community planning process. They undertake such special events as Gung Haggis Fat Choy, which is something I just attended. It was wonderful. The miners memorial picnic every year reminds the whole community of the significant history that mining and workers played in the South End of Nanaimo.

They do tree planting and a wonderful art bins program, where they paint colourful garbage cans and then do community cleanups. They have cleaned up the Nanaimo River Estuary and park as well.

This is a wonderful group, and I'd like all the members to help me congratulate and celebrate the South End Community Association for its fine work.

[1015]

RALPH DREW AND VILLAGE OF BELCARRA

L. Reimer: Today I rise in the House to recognize a remarkable constituent, Ralph Drew, current mayor of Belcarra and recently published author. In October of 2013 Mayor Drew culminated ten years of impeccably detailed research, a labour of love, with the release of his book Forest and Fjord: the History of Belcarra. I had the pleasure of attending Mayor Drew's book launch on October 20. It was a very happy day for him and our constituents.

This book celebrates the heritage of Belcarra, a vibrant village of about 700 residents nestled between the North Shore Mountains and Burrard Inlet, and describes the area's cultural and social transformation from its early years. Through his eloquent words and beautifully chosen images, Mayor Drew weaves a rich tapestry of historical fabric, describing the area's geography and waterways, local First Nations history, early exploration and settlement, resource industry development, the arrival of the CP Railway, population growth in Vancouver and, finally, the official incorporation of the village of Belcarra in 1879.

This book connects us strongly to a place, time and community, adding considerably to our knowledge and appreciation of the events and characters that shaped this area's history. Hundreds of collected photographs, images and stories are woven in the narrative, adding a variety of perspectives and accounts into the rich text. I'm pleased to be providing a copy of Forest and Fjord: the History of Belcarra to you, hon. Speaker, and your office.

Author Ralph Drew has been the mayor of Belcarra for over 30 years and is the longest-serving Metro Vancouver director. In 2013 he was awarded the Queen Elizabeth II Diamond Jubilee Medal for his ongoing dedication to public service.

Will the House please join me in recognizing Mayor Ralph Drew for his dedication to the village of Belcarra and for the release of his remarkable tome, Forest and Fjord: the History of Belcarra.
[ Page 1781 ]

HISTORY OF SHIPBUILDING AND REPAIR
IN ESQUIMALT

M. Karagianis: I'm very pleased to stand in the House today and share the proud history of shipbuilding and ship repair in my constituency. It's a story that reaches back to 1876, when work began on the construction of a graving dock in Lang Cove in Esquimalt Harbour. It opened in 1887, giving the Royal Navy a greatly needed repair and refitting site on Canadian soil. In its first seven years of use, 24 merchant ships and 70 navy ships were serviced there.

The Esquimalt Marine Railway Co. established its shipyard at Lang Cove in 1893, known early on as the Bullen Yard. Scottish shipbuilding baron Sir Alfred Yarrow purchased the venture in 1914, just as Canada was going to war. It became known then as the Yarrows shipyard.

The federal government constructed a graving dock at Skinner's Cove, which opened in 1927, the second-largest in the world at that time. The three operations solidified Esquimalt's place as Canada's busiest shipbuilding and repair centre on the west coast. At its peak during the Second World War, Yarrows provided employment for more than 4,300 workers.

Today the naval base and the shipyards are the largest employer in the region, providing excellent family-supporting jobs. These shipyards are where thousands of ships have been repaired, hundreds have been built and where many B.C. ferries have been made and retrofitted. In recognition of its significance in Canadian naval history, Her Majesty's Canadian Dockyard, Esquimalt has been designated as a national historic site.

This is such a proud legacy in my community. I salute the men and women whose years of hard work and dedication have made Esquimalt, B.C., a preferred port of call for shipbuilding and repair, a legacy that we want to see for generations to come.

WOMEN'S HOCKEY EVENTS
IN DAWSON CREEK

M. Bernier: "Hello out there. We're on the air. It's 'Hockey Night' tonight." No, I'm not going to be talking about the late Stompin' Tom, who actually passed away a year ago today. But I am talking about hockey — women's hockey, to be precise. The city of Dawson Creek has an Encana events centre that's become the entertainment capital of the north, hosting major concerts, such as Stompin' Tom. It has also become world-renowned for major sporting events, showcasing top-level women's hockey.

In 2009 the community hosted the Olympic women's hockey team for their training camp in the lead-up to their gold-medal run at the Olympics. In 2012 they hosted the women's U-18 national championships. And now the city of Dawson Creek has just been shortlisted, down to two cities, to host the women's 2016 IIHF World Championships.

[1020]

This is an incredible opportunity for the region but I'd say for British Columbia as well. These events happen in our smaller communities because of the amazing people who come forward and volunteer to make sure that we can showcase the region to the world.

I want to thank the Encana Events Centre; their wonderful staff, led by Ryan MacIver and his group; along with the city of Dawson Creek's parks and rec director, Barry Reynard, and his staff.

I'm confident that Dawson Creek is going to win that bid, and I'm looking forward to inviting everybody here in 2016 to celebrate the world championships in the South Peace.

CAMPBELL RIVER SEARCH AND RESCUE

C. Trevena: Hikers lost in the mountains of Strathcona Park, mushroom pickers who have not returned, people stranded in the bush — people who may not make it home to their families if it wasn't for the dedicated group of volunteers at Campbell River Search and Rescue.

It's not only those who have had an accident while in the back country or those who've pushed themselves beyond their own limits. The team is also called out to assist in finding missing seniors or perhaps people who may have mental health issues.

The 40 or so volunteers don't see themselves as heroes, but they commit at least 100 hours a year — and usually much, much more — with regular weekly meetings, equipment checks and hours and hours of training.

Before a volunteer goes out into the field, she or he must commit to 80 hours of training. That includes everything from map and compass reading through to rope rescues and overnight survival.

The biggest financial commitment for the group is the equipment — three trucks, one of which is a command centre with the latest in radio communications and electronic mapping. The organization obviously relies heavily on donations because they have to have the most recently approved version of any piece of equipment, whether that's a life jacket, a helmet or some of the hundreds and hundreds of metres of rope they use, and that's expensive.

Individuals, service clubs and businesses in Campbell River are generous with their donations, but it's an ongoing task to get the money to do their job.

The territory the organization covers is vast and often desolate — the top half of the island over to the Homathko Icefields on the mainland. And they've been called in as far as Bella Coola and up to Haida Gwaii.

No two searches are quite the same — different locations, different circumstances. There are two distinct parts of this job: search and rescue. They don't always go hand in hand. As one of the members said: "Search and
[ Page 1782 ]
rescue are definably different."

The question sometimes arises of whether a person who has been rescued should be billed for the cost of the help. That's something that the search and rescue team don't want to see. They fear it would deter people from calling on their expert help, which in turn could lead to more problems. These are hard-working volunteers who prefer that they continue to be called upon than someone's life be put at risk.

TIM HORTONS BRIER CURLING EVENT
IN KAMLOOPS

G. Kyllo: I rise in the House to speak to you about one of the most famous and iconic Canadian sporting events. And no, it has nothing to do with hockey. I'm speaking about the 2014 Tim Hortons Brier. While the competition takes place next door to my constituency, the Shuswap, it is an honour that the great city of Kamloops, Canada's tournament capital, is hosting this year's Brier.

The city is already buzzing with the activity of thousands of fans from throughout B.C., out of province and internationally, flocking to Kamloops, giving the local and regional economy an influx of over $6 million, particularly benefiting the hospitality and tourism industry.

I know that my colleagues the hon. Minister of Transportation and Minister of Health, who represent Kamloops in this chamber, worked hard to bring the Brier to our region. But without the help of Norm Daley and the host committee, the Canadian Curling Association, Curl B.C. and all of the volunteers, this event would not be the amazing success that it is today.

With six days of competition left, there is still plenty of time to watch the intense competitions unfold. For the information of the members in this House, as of last night, in the round robin, B.C. stands in second place with four wins and one loss. We couldn't be prouder of skip John Morris and Team B.C.

We're all cheering for you, and we look forward to a great week of curling. So hurry hard, gentlemen, and good luck.

Oral Questions

HEALTH CARE WORKER LAYOFFS
AT RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITIES
ON VANCOUVER ISLAND

A. Dix: Madame Speaker, 380 health care workers on Vancouver Island are about to lose their jobs due to private health employers flipping contracts in publicly funded facilities. At New Horizons in Campbell River, 120 people have been given notice — and 260 at Sunridge Place in Duncan. This affects more than 250 residents and their families.

[1025]

These corporate takeovers, which are the cause of this, are hurting families, the elderly, the vulnerable and those who care for them.

Does the minister agree with the Ombudsperson and common sense that mass layoffs harm patients and staff alike, and will he take action to do something about it?

Hon. T. Lake: Our priority, of course, is the care and safety of residents who are at the facilities operated by not just health authorities and non-profits but also by private providers.

Island Health has a contractual arrangement with the operator of New Horizons to provide services for clients in care, and we expect that any operational changes are done in a way that ensures a continual high level of care. Operators under those contracts have an obligation to maintain that high quality of care, and Island Health, along with the ministry, will ensure that that is in fact the case.

Madame Speaker: The Leader of the Opposition on a supplemental.

A. Dix: Operational changes? Everyone is getting laid off. The care aides who provide care directly to residents are being laid off. Their lives are being disrupted by these changes. It's a disruption, surely, in the continuity of care.

If the minister is saying he is taking charge of the matter, why does he think it's acceptable — because of a contract flip, because of an arrangement in a publicly funded facility to sell the facility — that everyone is getting laid off? How does he think that contributes to the continuity of care, and will he do anything about it?

Hon. T. Lake: As I mentioned, Island Health will be ensuring that high-quality care is maintained in the transition. I understand that most, if not all, of the employees will be rehired, and it is the obligation of Island Health and with the Ministry of Health to ensure that those residents in care have high-quality care and that they are not affected by this transition. We will be ensuring that that will in fact be the case.

Madame Speaker: The Leader of the Opposition on a supplemental.

A. Dix: Perhaps if the minister would visit the facilities, talk to the workers, talk to the residents, talk to their families, he would understand that his policies are harming the quality of care. These actions are the direct result — even in Park Place the new owner acknowledges this — of government policy.

I mean, how disrespectful it is of people who go to work and work hard for the government and the minister to say, "Oh, I think they'll be rehired" at, presumably, a lower salary. How disrespectful is that of people who
[ Page 1783 ]
work hard?

You know the executives of B.C. Ferries? When the government wants to do something about their bonuses, they add the bonus to the base salary. That's what they do. When it comes to hard-working health care workers and the residents they serve, there's no action at all. There's no action at all. It's contemptible.

Why doesn't the minister do something? Because, in fact, in this case, residents and their families in Campbell River have spoken clearly in opposition to this, why doesn't he do something to protect the quality of care in these facilities?

Hon. T. Lake: I've had the opportunity to visit a number of long-term residential care facilities around the province. These are facilities that take care of those people who for many years took care of us. The men and the women who work in these nursing facilities, whether they are run by health authorities or non-profit organizations or private providers, do an amazing job looking after a very vulnerable part of our population.

[1030]

We have increased the number of long-term residential care beds by 5,000 since 2001. I did not see anything in the opposition's campaign that they would do away with private providers. These are men and women that provide great care, and it is our duty and the health authorities' duty to ensure that that care continues in any transition period. We will continue to ensure that high-quality care remains for the seniors of our province.

Interjections.

Madame Speaker: Hon. Members, the Chair needs to hear the answer and the question.

K. Conroy: I, too, have travelled to facilities in this province, and I've talked to the seniors and their families. What they're telling me is that a lot of those seniors don't even remember their families. The caregivers are their families. They're the people that take care of them. They're the people….

Interjections.

K. Conroy: Constant turnover at care facilities compromises the very care that these seniors are getting. It's a direct result of the legislation that this government brought in, in 2002 — legislation that's subsequently been found illegal — which paved the way for the layoff of over 8,000 health care workers in this province.

Once again, this government is refusing to protect seniors from mass layoffs that this government originated, that this government made possible. Will the minister finally stand up for those seniors, stand up for those families and stand up for the caregivers, who dearly love those seniors?

Hon. T. Lake: I agree with the member opposite that the men and women that are caring for our seniors in long-term residential care facilities around the province are indeed like their family. That is why we will ensure that the transition of any ownership change ensures that that same high quality of care continues. I've said that, and we will continue to do just that.

Madame Speaker: The member for Kootenay West on a supplemental.

K. Conroy: This continues to happen. How many more facilities are we going to hear about? How many more times are we going to hear about seniors that are suffering under the hands of this government?

Seniors and families don't want this legislation that makes these mass layoffs happen. The health care workers don't want them. The communities don't want them.

More than 5,000 people have signed a petition that calls on the government to stop the turnover of staff at New Horizons in Campbell River. It's obvious that this government is the only one…. They're the only people who think this is the right thing to do. When will the minister commit to ending these policies that put profits before the care of vulnerable seniors?

Hon. T. Lake: As I mentioned earlier, we have been able to increase the number of spaces available to look after our vulnerable senior citizens around the province. There was a time in my city of Kamloops where one could not find a place for their elderly parent. Now that waiting list has been reduced to zero with the opening of the Gem Centre.

The men and women who look after our vulnerable population in those care facilities around the province do an amazing job. We have increased the hours of care for each of those residents of our long-term residential care facilities. We ensure there are standards that are adhered to. We do regular inspections that are available on the Internet, and we are going to continue so that high level of care is maintained through any transition period.

GOVERNMENT ACTION ON
SKILLS TRAINING AND
PROJECT LABOUR AGREEMENTS

D. Routley: I think everyone in this province and certainly everyone in this House should know that this province needs more trained and skilled workers to sustain its major industries as well as its small businesses.

In response to that, the Jobs Minister told the major industries of this province and the people that they lacked the essential information to make key decisions about the skills shortage. I quote the minister: "Data drives decision-making, and we don't have the data we need
[ Page 1784 ]
and have to create a system for the data we are collecting."

[1035]

Well, the data does exist, and it tells us that this government's abysmal apprenticeship completion rates have fallen to a new three-year low of 33 percent.

To the minister, in the face of all of this data and in the face of something that every British Columbian recognizes, can she explain to this House why her government is flatlining support and funding for skills training?

Hon. S. Bond: We know that British Columbia is facing unprecedented opportunities in terms of projects and investments that want to move forward. Yes, actually, I did say data drives decisions, because, in fact, this side of the House believes you actually have to understand the circumstances rather than writing a plan on the back of a napkin.

We are engaged with LNG proponents, with mining proponents, with all of the major projects in British Columbia….

Interjections.

Madame Speaker: Members. Minister.

Minister, please continue.

Hon. S. Bond: We are engaged, as a government, with all of the major project proponents to actually determine exactly how many workers they need, where they need them, and what kind of skilled work they need so that we can create a plan that matches the needs of employers in British Columbia. That's exactly what we should be doing.

D. Routley: The province, its industries, its abysmally and terribly high youth unemployment rate…. All those people — they all need more than words and slogans. There was no plan in the budget. There was no plan in the throne speech. They say they have a jobs plan, and yet we're losing jobs. We have people without the skills necessary to take the jobs that exist, and we're having to rely on a larger number of temporary foreign workers than any other province. That's the fact. That's what we face.

What is the government doing to address this? Well, what they could do…. They have the means to help. They could enter into agreements, project labour agreements, with the industry and government so that publicly funded projects are ensured to have apprentices. That would help. They could have been used successfully in the past to train apprentices and build such important public infrastructure projects as the John Hart dam, right here on Vancouver Island.

Will the minister accept this advice and put in place a framework for project labour agreements that will help train B.C. workers and improve apprentice completion rates? Or will it simply be more slogans?

Hon. S. Bond: One thing I know, on this side of the House: this is a government that encourages investment and actually works to yes on projects in the province. As we know and we saw witnessed time and time again, the only plan the members opposite have is to work to no and say no to every single project that's interested in investing in British Columbia.

We should be clear. Maybe the member opposite missed the part about how the Premier has actually brought together a working group on LNG that is engaging with the B.C. Federation of Labour and organized labour to actually talk exactly about that issue.

CHANGE TO PATIENT CARE MODEL
AT VANCOUVER ISLAND HOSPITALS

A. Weaver: We'll all notice it's a much quieter presentation here.

[1040]

Interjections.

A. Weaver: There we go. Okay.

Now, if I might ask my question.

Interjections.

Madame Speaker: Hon. Members.

A. Weaver: On April 23 Island Health will implement a new patient care model — care delivery model redesign, otherwise known as CDMR — at Victoria General and Royal Jubilee hospitals. In their CDMR fact sheet Island Health claims that the model will lead to "improved quality and patient safety." Island Health claims the model is based on evidence but has yet to make their evidence publicly available.

An internal survey shows that 88 percent of nurses working under CDMR at Nanaimo Regional General Hospital would not feel comfortable having a family member cared for in their own units. Last week I held a town forum on CDMR that raised a number of additional concerns.

My question is to the Minister of Health. As a publicly funded body, Island Health has an obligation to be accountable to British Columbians. Will the minister step in to insist that Island Health release its evidence for public scrutiny?

Hon. T. Lake: Thank you to the member for Oak Bay–Gordon Head for the question. I had mentioned that I've had an opportunity to travel around the province and meet a lot of the people who care for our patients in all kinds of settings. I think members on both sides of the House agree on the tremendous work that nurses and other health care professionals do for British Columbians.
[ Page 1785 ]

It's about appropriateness of care — the right care, the right provider, at the right place, right time, with the right resources. This is an effort on behalf of Island Health to ensure that we have those five Rs in place. This patient care model is to wrap services around the patient, which in some cases is appropriate in some situations. Some wards, where there are more personal care duties, are where you can use other professionals to aid the highly trained nurses, who can then spend more time doing patient care plans.

This was a result of a study done by Island Health. It's about providing the right care to the right patient at the right time with better outcomes. That is the goal, and that is what I believe will be happening, at the end of the day, with this new model.

Madame Speaker: The member for Oak Bay–Gordon Head on a supplemental.

A. Weaver: I actually have the evidence here, the evidence in the international peer-reviewed literature. That evidence is crystal-clear. Increasing the nurse-to-patient ratio beyond about 1 to 4, as will happen under CDMR, leads to higher mortality rates and higher morbidity rates.

Just last week, the day before I held my CDMR forum, a study of more than 400,000 patients in 300 hospitals across Europe, published in the prestigious medical journal Lancet, the second-highest-impact journal in the field of medical studies, found that increasing a nurse's workload by even one patient increased the mortality by 7 percent. There is also substantive evidence….

Madame Speaker: Can the member pose his question?

A. Weaver: Yes, sorry.

There is substantive research that suggests that increased nursing levels will reduce hospital stays, reduce the rate of adverse events and reduce turnover rates…

Madame Speaker: Can the member pose his question?

A. Weaver: …and these are all cost-saving measures. That's why jurisdictions like California have responded to the evidence, and this is why I ask the minister: will he step in to protect patients by insisting Island Health release their evidence and by initiating an independent review of this proposed program?

Hon. T. Lake: I mentioned in my first answer that it's the appropriateness that's important. We must be led by evidence. The member is quoting from a study in the Lancet that looked at surgical patients, not medical patients, not rehabilitation patients — surgical patients.

In that particular instance it may not be appropriate to move away from the one-to-one type of nursing model that is in place for surgical patients that are being looked after, after a surgery. However, for rehabilitation, the use of health care aides, along with LPNs and led by RNs, is a much more efficient system, allowing nurses to do the job that they are highly trained to do.

[1045]

That is the appropriate situation, and that is the intent of looking at new and better ways of caring for our patients in the hospital system of British Columbia.

SKILLED WORKER SUPPLY AND TRAINING
AND USE OF FOREIGN WORKERS

H. Bains: We know that this government has flatlined the skills training and cut the budget for post-secondary education. This means that a young British Columbian will continue to be placed at the back of the line for new jobs, because without ensuring that recent graduates have the skills and training for those jobs, more and more of these jobs are being filled by temporary foreign workers.

Can the minister tell this House: will she finally take some right steps so that our British Columbians, especially the young British Columbians, have the skills and training they need for those jobs so that they can be in the front of the line for those jobs?

Hon. S. Bond: Well, absolutely. One of the things that drives this government's agenda every single day is ensuring that we attract investment to British Columbia, that we create the kinds of jobs that create family-supporting incomes. That's exactly what we're doing. We're saying yes to economic development, yes to investment and yes to new jobs in British Columbia with British Columbians in line first.

H. Bains: The facts are clear. We know British Columbians are at the back of the line for those jobs. We saw that at HD Mining, when skilled workers were neglected in favour of foreign workers. That's why we saw that 13,000 British Columbians left British Columbia. They're fleeing British Columbia because they couldn't find jobs here.

Currently we hire more temporary foreign workers than any other province in Canada — twice the average of Canadian numbers. No wonder we have more young people out of school out of work than any other province in Canada. So much for the jobs plan.

What are the other provinces doing right that our province is doing so wrong? Among the worst in private sector job growth and the worst record on temporary foreign workers. What is the minister doing to fix the problem that her government has caused?

Hon. S. Bond: It's pretty ironic to hear the member opposite get up and talk about supporting mining and looking for miners. The only place we could find a miner back
[ Page 1786 ]
in the day when the member opposite was in government was in the endangered species section of the Royal B.C. Museum. Drove them out of the province.

Let's talk about jobs. Let's talk about unemployment. The members opposite have the dubious distinction of being the government that drove British Columbia to have-not status in this country. Shame on them.

I just would like to remind the members opposite that today in British Columbia, unemployment…

Interjections.

Madame Speaker: Hon. Members.

Hon. S. Bond: …is in single digit everywhere in this province. I can tell you, Madame Speaker, that where I live in Prince George, in the 1990s it was hovering at almost 17 percent. Today it's 5 percent.

TEMPORARY FOREIGN WORKER PROGRAM
AND PROTECTION FOR WORKERS

S. Simpson: I'm glad to see the minister is at her sanctimonious best, but if she'd answer the questions, we'd all be better off.

[1050]

We have 158,000 people unemployed in this province, and we now have 74,000 temporary foreign workers — 13 percent of the population and 22 percent of the foreign workers. Yet this government does nothing to ensure that the jobs that should come to British Columbians are coming to British Columbians.

Hon. Speaker, we know that the government is not going to do anything to create that situation, so, at a minimum, will the government protect those temporary foreign workers who are being exploited in this province? That's the reality.

Will you put in place a compulsory registration program for employers, will you put a phone line in so that workers can express their complaints, and will you allow the employment standards branch to be proactive, to protect those workers when they are exploited? That's what we need in British Columbia.

We need to either protect these vulnerable workers or admit to British Columbians that the government doesn't care. What is it, Minister — protect them, or tell us you don't care?

Hon. S. Bond: We do expect employers in British Columbia to protect every worker, whether they come from British Columbia, the rest of Canada or anywhere in the world. We should be clear about this. We have said that British Columbians will come first.

The member opposite should well know that the temporary foreign worker program is administered by the federal government, and it has rigorous standards. In fact, the federal government has recently made changes to enhance protection and to ensure that there is a rigorous labour market opinion before anyone is brought to this country as a temporary worker.

We're committed to this. We're going to continue to create jobs, say yes to investment and make sure that British Columbians have an opportunity that simply would not have existed under the members opposite.

S. Simpson: The minister will know that while it's a federal program, the enforcement and standards are a provincial responsibility. Other provinces have accepted that responsibility. They have required the employers to, in fact, register. They've made those obligations on employers. British Columbia hasn't done that. As a result, workers are exploited in this province, and it's because you're not doing your job.

Pretty simple steps, hon. Speaker. Put in a toll-free help line for vulnerable workers, with a variety of languages, so that they can get help. Put a registry in place so we know which employers are here, who they have as temporary foreign workers, and what they're doing. Then we might know if British Columbians could do that work. Empower employment standards with some resources to be proactive, to put dedicated investigators in place and to protect those workers.

It doesn't happen today, and it won't happen if this government doesn't act. Why is the minister opposed to these basic supports for our most vulnerable workers?

Hon. S. Bond: The member opposite points out what all of us would want and expect in this province — that employers recognize that employment standards cover all workers in British Columbia. We expect employers to treat workers in this province with dignity and respect and to protect them.

That's why very recently, in the last couple of weeks, in one of my regular quarterly meetings with the B.C. Federation of Labour and other and specific members we agreed to have a discussion about how to better protect workers in this province. I'm committed to working constructively with the B.C. Federation of Labour, and I'm happy to have that discussion with them in my regular quarterly meetings.

MILL OPERATIONS
AND FOREST INDUSTRY JOBS

B. Routley: Between 2001 and 2011 B.C. lost 151 mills, including 84 lumber mills, six pulp mills and a host of plywood and shake and shingle operations. B.C. has lost more than 30,000 family-supporting jobs in the forestry sector, and now we face losing even more mills in communities like Quesnel and Houston.

[1055]

To the minister: with the growing B.C. timber supply
[ Page 1787 ]
crisis, what steps does this government plan to take to ensure that B.C. logs create B.C. jobs?

Hon. S. Thomson: We have worked in partnership with the forest industry and worked in partnership with the federal government to make sure that we have created a globally competitive forest industry here in British Columbia. What has been the result is $11.6 billion in export value, up 53 percent since 2009, and over 58,000 jobs in the forest sector in British Columbia. That's a 13 percent increase since 2009.

We will continue to work in partnership with the industry to make sure that we continue to provide those important jobs in all communities in British Columbia. That's our commitment. We have brought the industry through one of the most difficult times in the industry, through 2009 and the collapse of the U.S. housing market. We will continue to work with them to make sure that we can continue to build export value and continue to build jobs, as we have been doing.

[End of question period.]

Madame Speaker: Hon. Members, may I remind all members that the use of props is not permitted in this chamber.

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. de Jong: In Committee A we move into estimates, beginning with the Ministry of Advanced Education, and in this House, second reading of Bill 8, Budget Measures Implementation Act, 2014.

[R. Chouhan in the chair.]

Second Reading of Bills

BILL 8 — BUDGET MEASURES
IMPLEMENTATION ACT, 2014

Hon. M. de Jong: I move that Bill 8 be read a second time now.

Bill 8 promotes a number of social policy and economic development initiatives. It also, in my view, provides for sound management of the government's budget and finances. It consists of two parts. Part 1 has four provisions that will enable government's management of the 2014-15 budget. Part 2 amends 15 statutes in order to implement many of the tax measures in the 2014-15 budget.

In part 1 the Public Service Benefit Plan Act and the Public Sector Pension Plans Act are amended to establish statutory appropriations for expenses resulting from unforeseen changes in the actuarial evaluations of the long-term disability fund and the public sector pensions.

These are important benefits for the public service. They ensure financial security for public service employees in the event of disability and for public sector employees in their retirement. Government's annual contributions to these plans are provided for in the benefits vote, subject to debate and approval by the Legislature. However, these plans are also reviewed by actuaries on a periodic basis to insure the net fiscal positions of the plans. Their actuarial valuations are sufficient to cover future obligations.

[1100]

The plan valuations are reset at the time of the actuarial review. Occasionally — although, happily, not often — these resets result in expenses being charged against the fiscal plan. Whether or not there will be expenses resulting from actuarial evaluations of these plans or in what amounts is not determinable ahead of time. Therefore, the government is seeking, through this bill and this provision, statutory appropriation for these types of expenses in the event that they occur. Statutory appropriations of this sort for unforeseeable expenses — such as those related to firefighting, emergency programs and Crown proceedings — are a standard practice in this parliament.

Bill 8 increases the balance in the First Nations clean energy business fund special account by $1 million in order to provide additional resources for this initiative. The First Nations clean energy business fund was created in 2010 with a balance of $5 million. The fund's purpose was to facilitate participation of First Nations in clean, renewable energy projects within their traditional territories.

Since then, British Columbia has invested the $5 million in supporting the participation of over 90 aboriginal communities in the clean energy sector, including wind energy, biomass and run-of-the-river hydroelectric power projects.

In 2013 British Columbia signed the first four revenue-sharing agreements with First Nations. These First Nations are now sharing in the revenues received from clean energy projects. This initiative will provide ongoing benefits to First Nations, and government is pleased to supplement the initial balance in the fund with an additional $1 million.

At the request of its trustees, part 1 of Bill 8 also validates in legislation the Gwaii Forest Charitable Trust in order to ensure the trust can continue to carry out its purposes. The Gwaii Forest Charitable Trust was established in March 2007 under agreement with the Gwaii Trust Society and the federal government.

Under the agreement, the trust assumed implementation of the forest management and community sustainability purposes originally outlined in the South Moresby forest replacement account. The intent of the agreement has been faithfully carried out by the trustees. However, the trust deed in the agreement was not complete in all its legal details. The trustees alerted us to the failures in the trust deed and requested that we validate the trust
[ Page 1788 ]
in legislation.

The forest management and community sustainability purposes of the trust agreement are important to the forest sector on Haida Gwaii, the Council of the Haida Nation and their local communities. The government, through this legislation, wishes to provide for the continued and seamless operation of the Gwaii Forest Charitable Trust in order to ensure the purposes continue to be met.

Part 2 of Bill 8 amends 15 statutes to implement many of the tax measures announced in the 2014-15 budget.

Bill 8 amends the Income Tax Act to implement the B.C. early childhood tax benefit, as announced last year. Effective April 1, 2015, families will receive a maximum benefit of $55 per month for each child under the age of six.

Overall, $146 million will be distributed annually to approximately 180,000 B.C. families with young children. This benefit is part of the comprehensive early-years strategy announced in the June Update 2013 to help parents balance the demands of work and family and to help set children up for lifelong success.

Individuals and businesses also are supported through amendments to extend the B.C. mining flow-through share tax credit to the end of 2014. B.C.'s mineral exploration and mining industry is, of course, a vital part of our economy, and the flow-through share tax credit will help encourage continued investment in mineral exploration and development.

The Income Tax Act is amended to extend the scientific research and experimental development tax credit for an additional three years. Extending the credit will encourage investment in R and D, promoting greater economic growth and helping British Columbia compete in a global economy.

As well, the Income Tax Act is amended to continue the preferential corporate income tax treatment for credit unions until 2016. The preferential tax treatment will phase out over five years, beginning in 2016. These changes are arising in the aftermath of changes to the federal taxation structure governing credit unions here in British Columbia.

[1105]

Bill 8 amends the Tobacco Tax Act to increase the tax rate by 32 cents per pack. That translates into 1.6 cents per gram of fine-cut tobacco. That is effective April 1, 2014.

This tax rate increase builds on what I believe has been a successful multifaceted tobacco control strategy to encourage and help British Columbians to stop smoking. The strategy is showing very positive signs. British Columbia currently has the lowest smoking rate in Canada, at just over 14 percent. We are anxious to see that rate drop, and the sooner the better.

Bill 8 amends the Provincial Sales Tax Act to clarify the rule to determine the purchase price of accommodation that is purchased with meals and services for a single price. Previously the rule only applied to guide-outfitters, fishing lodges and guest ranches providing specific services. Effective February 19 the rule is expanded to apply to all such packages regardless of the type of service provided and regardless of the type of accommodation provider.

Bill 8 also amends the Provincial Sales Tax Act to implement the previously announced change to the multi-jurisdictional vehicle exit tax. Retroactive to April 1, 2013, the multi-jurisdictional exit tax will only apply to vehicles which previously were licensed under prorate when they are subsequently licensed for use solely within British Columbia. Any person who has paid the exit tax since April 1, 2013, in circumstances other than where the vehicle is licensed for use solely within British Columbia will be entitled to a refund of the exit tax paid.

The Provincial Sales Tax Act also is amended to make a number of technical amendments to the provincial sales tax for clarity and certainty, including related amendments to the Provincial Sales Tax Transitional Provisions and Amendments Act, 2013; the Special Accounts Appropriation and Control Act; the Sustainable Environment Fund Act; and the Transportation Act.

These amendments clarify various technical and administrative provisions, including certain exemptions and refunds; taxation of leases; the original purchase price of certain passenger vehicles subject to the 1 to 3 percent surtax; the taxation of vehicles brought, sent or received in British Columbia and registered under vehicle registration legislation; the purchase price of software purchased with qualifying educational programs for a single price; tax payments agreements for eligible businesses; and the taxation of tangible personal property used to improve real estate.

The amendments also expand voluntary registration to include out-of-province businesses.

Bill 8 amends the Carbon Tax Act and Motor Fuel Tax Act to facilitate vendor compliance with collector obligations by authorizing the director to appoint a vendor as a collector retroactively. This provides a mechanism to allow vendors who have, through honest mistake, failed to comply with their collector obligations to get back into compliance. The penalties which may be imposed on a vendor who sells fuel before being appointed a collector are also clarified to recognize retroactive collector appointments.

The Carbon Tax Act and Motor Fuel Tax Act also are amended to clarify the assessment of interest, consistent with similar provisions in the Provincial Sales Tax Act.

The Land Tax Deferment Act is amended by Bill 8 to allow a deferment agreement to continue when the property becomes subject to an easement, statutory right-of-way or similar interest. The homeowner must continue to meet the minimum equity requirements of the program.

Bill 8 amends the Property Transfer Tax Act to increase the fair market threshold for eligible residential
[ Page 1789 ]
property under the first-time-homebuyers program, effective for registrations on or after February 19, 2014. The threshold is increased to $475,000 from $425,000. We believe this will benefit approximately 1,700 additional first-time buyers annually, saving them up to $7,500.

Bill 8 amends the Ports Property Tax Act in the following ways. It extends the municipal tax rate caps on designated port property and new improvements past 2018. It removes the condition that new improvements under the act must be added to an assessment roll before 2019. It extends the provisions for compensation to municipalities. These changes were announced originally in Budget 2012.

[1110]

The University Act is amended to confirm that property of a university that is leased to a college affiliated with the university is exempt from property taxation so long as it is held for college purposes. The amendment clarifies that both the land and improvements are exempt, which is the current tax treatment. The exemption is effective for the 2014 taxation year.

The Regent College Act is amended to provide an exemption from property tax for property of Regent College so as long as the property is occupied by the college and used by it for educational purposes. The exemption confirms the tax treatment that Regent College is already receiving and also is effective for the 2014 taxation year.

Finally, Bill 8 amends the School Act to eliminate the tax credit that reduced provincial school property taxes payable on light industry properties by 60 percent. This completes the phase-out of the class 5 school property tax credit as announced in Budget 2013.

A number of the provisions I referred to are technical in nature. If I already haven't done so, I would offer the hon. opposition critic or independent members a briefing on any of the technical aspects of the bill prior to it reaching committee stage. I'll await further comment from the House.

M. Farnworth: It's my pleasure to rise to speak to Bill 8, the Budget Measures Implementation Act, 2014. This is a standard piece of legislation that accompanies every budget that's tabled in British Columbia. It is a rather dry and technical piece of legislation, where the details and much of the discussion, as is, will take place during committee stage on our clause-by-clause examination. As the minister has kindly offered a technical briefing on some of the key aspects of the bill, I'll be happy to take that up, because some of them are rather in-depth.

This is an opportunity for us to examine some of the issues in this bill that are going to be dealt with. The key one, I think, is that what this bill does is it allows the government to implement measures outlined in the budget. Some of them are administrative. Some of them are very pro forma, technical. Others are substantive in their nature and allow the government to implement significant changes within the budget.

It's really interesting. When the budget was tabled, the Premier was very proud of her budget. She was out across the province making a number of comments and statements about the budget. I think it's important that we just refresh ourselves on what those statements were, because they apply to some of the changes that are going to be in place with the passage of Bill 8, the Budget Implementation Measures Act.

On the 21st of February on CHBC News the Premier said: "We are aren't going to increase taxes. We didn't increase taxes." Then a day later she said: "We balanced the budget. We did not do it by raising taxes, borrowing or stealing." That's what the Premier said. It's on the public record. Those are her words. They're not mine.

Yet when we look at the Budget Measures Implementation Act, it's really quite interesting. As my colleague the Finance Minister has outlined, there are some significant changes in this budget that do just that. For example, there is the tobacco tax increase.

The Finance Minister, as am I, is a former Health Minister, and we know that tobacco taxes are influential in helping to control smoking in this province and are one of the reasons why we have low rates of smoking in British Columbia. But it's still a tax increase. It's still a tax increase — when the Premier is out saying: "Oh no, we didn't increase taxes."

Whether the increase is the right thing to do or not, whether it's perceived to be popular by most of the province or not, the fact is that it is a tax increase. It's unfortunate that the Premier doesn't recognize this or won't admit to this. It's a real shame, because I think that her words would have more credibility if she were to go out there and say: "You know what? We did increase taxes, and here's why." Instead, she sticks to a mantra which is simply not true: "We balanced this budget without taking money out of your pockets, without raising taxes." That is simply just the way it is.

[1115]

There's another element. When we deal with that section, there will be some questions that I do have on that that I want to ask the minister. I'll make him aware of them now so that he's able to get the information.

We know that raising taxes on tobacco is a very strong way to influence the habits of people who do smoke and to reduce the use of tobacco in the province of British Columbia. It has been proven to work. This increase that the province is putting forward is also on top of an increase that the federal government has just put on as well.

One of the things that we also know is that at some point you do reach a tipping point whereby tobacco smuggling starts to become an issue, as we have seen in other jurisdictions in this country, particularly in Ontario and Quebec and, to a certain extent, in some of the prairie provinces — in Manitoba, Saskatchewan.
[ Page 1790 ]

One of the questions that I will be asking the minister at the committee stage is: have the government and the Finance Ministry done analysis on the issue of tobacco smuggling in British Columbia? At what point does the Minister of Finance see that the increase on tobacco taxes may well start to see a result in tobacco smuggling?

With that comes an attendant rise in costs in other areas of government. You start to see an offsetting of the revenue that you're getting from your tax increase on tobacco because you're now having to spend more in other areas. So I'd be interested to know if the government has done some analysis in that area, and that will be something that we will be addressing in committee stage.

Another area that I think is as important in this particular budget…. Again, it's not something that the government has really trumpeted — or, certainly, the Premier hasn't trumpeted — by saying that we're not increasing taxes, that we didn't increase taxes. Again, it's something that we will explore in committee stage. It is an issue that impacts manufacturing in this province. It impacts light industry in this province. It is the elimination — the phasing-out or the continued phasing-out — of the 60 percent school tax credit on light industrial properties in British Columbia. That is expected to save the government some $55 million. That is not an insignificant amount of money, but that also comes from, in essence, light industry paying more in taxes.

It's not something the government has really trumpeted, but those industrial properties, those companies, those light industrials, many of which are small and medium-sized operations, will be paying more in taxes. That's an additional $55 million tax burden. Again, the government feels that it's justified and that it's a good public policy decision to do this, but the reality is that it is a tax increase for the people who are having to pay that.

I raise that because it flies in the face of the Premier's comments when she said — and I feel I have to come back to this quote: "We said we weren't going to increase taxes. We didn't increase taxes." Then the other one that is just so good: "We did not do it by raising taxes, borrowing or stealing." Well, I'm quite sure there's a whole segment of industry in this province, the light industrial property owners or the property owners who are looking, going: "Well, that's not my interpretation. I have a different point of view than the Premier does."

Again, I think it's important to raise these issues, to remind members across the way that just because the Premier says it's so does not mean that it is. We see that when we start to look at the budget documents and the bills that are tabled by the Finance Minister in his role as the guardian of the public purse in the province of British Columbia. These are issues we will be addressing as we go through committee stage on Bill 8.

[1120]

There are other areas that I think are important, that at committee stage we want to be looking at. I note with great interest…. Many of these are issues that the opposition supports, but at the same time it is important that we make sure that when there are tax changes that have been put in place, or have been in place for some time, that from time to time they're evaluated to make sure they are continuing to meet and do the job that they were intended to do.

The reason I say that is the scientific research and experimental development tax credit costs about $170 million a year. It has been extended by three years. We want to encourage scientific development. We want to encourage research in the province of British Columbia. Tax credits are one way to do that. But I also think it's important that we look at, from time to time, the work that's being done on how effective initiatives like that are.

Again, when we're at committee stage I will be asking the minister some questions around that. There has been work done, particularly at the federal level, that has raised questions about the efficacy of tax credits versus other means of investing in the science and research development in Canada and the provinces. Are there more effective ways?

The question is not whether we should continue to do that, but has the minister looked at other ways in which that money can be delivered in a way that is effective? Again, that's an area that I think we need to be looking at when we come to committee stage on the bill.

The mining flow-through share tax credit for another year. It continues until 2014. This was an issue that was addressed, was actually looked at, during the Finance Committee's tour earlier this year, when we travelled around British Columbia. This is something that this side of the House has supported over the years. I will have a few questions on that when we're at committee stage.

As well, I want to look at the ports property tax cap. It was created in 2004 with a sunset clause, and it was extended in 2007. This is now made permanent. Some of the questions I want to ask around that are: has the ministry done analysis on the benefits that the cap has created? Have they done any work in determining how successful the work is that leads to the extension of that by making it permanent?

I think we do need to encourage investment in the port, but I also want to make sure that when we're making these decisions to either extend a tax that was intended to be temporary or with a sunset clause that we also have analysis to go with it.

When we're saying that we're now going to make it permanent, we're able to say: "Look, here are the costs associated with making it permanent, but also here are the benefits associated with making it permanent — so that we know that we are, in fact, making the right decision." I think that, again, is an area that I would like us to be able to explore during committee stage on the debate, and I'm just letting the Finance Minister know ahead of time some of the questions that we will have around that.
[ Page 1791 ]

Finally, on the issues of pensions, I know most of them are administrative, but we'll probably spend a little bit of time on that. My hope at this particular point in time…. I know that we have other legislation and other speakers. I have a colleague who has a brief comment on this particular piece of legislation. I'll yield the floor to him.

In concluding my remarks, as I said earlier, this is a standard bill. Much of it is technical, but there are some important changes in this that we will explore further in committee stage. Most importantly, what is interesting about this particular piece of legislation is that once again it points out what the Premier really chooses to ignore. Despite what the Premier says about not raising taxes, there are tax increases that this piece of legislation will put into place. That's the fact.

With that, I take my place, and I look forward to comments from my colleague from Columbia River–Revelstoke.

[1125]

N. Macdonald: I'll just be very brief.

The issue that's within this bill that seems to take care of something that was important in my area was the changes to the PST and municipal and regional district tax, which was about accommodations with special services.

There was correspondence that we provided to you where we asked for the definition of special services on guiding services. It was as defined by the Wildlife Act. One of the concerns that operators in our areas, which had guides that were not defined under the Wildlife Act but, in fact, were guiding services as defined or as put forward by the Association of Canadian Mountain Guides and other professional organizations…. This bill changes that.

The reason I mention this is because, for people who bring these things forward to us, as MLAs, and we take up the line…. This moved fairly quickly. This was Lake O'Hara Lodge speaking to us, I think, simply as recently as in the summer about their concern around this. I think it's important for people to know that…. Here I'm assuming, as they have assumed, that this was the impetus for the change. But I'm sure you've heard from many operators.

In any case, the system has worked the way it was. It's fairly mundane to most people, about the changes, but really significant for the operators. That's good.

I would point out that the application to the PST to thrift stores…. I've also provided correspondence on that. If, indeed, this was the way that you made changes as related to this bill, I just refer the minister to other correspondence I've sent with advice on changes to tax policy. Maybe we could get on a real roll with these things.

Thanks. That's all I wanted to say.

I think, for the operator at Lake O'Hara Lodge, if the minister has never been there…. If you do show up, you can say that you did what the gentleman asked you to do.

Deputy Speaker: Seeing no other speakers, the minister to conclude.

Hon. M. de Jong: Thanks to the hon. critic and the member from Revelstoke for those thoughts and observations. I'll take that as an invitation to the lodge and do my best to make the trip worthwhile from a food and accommodation perspective.

I think my remaining task is simply to move second reading and have the question put.

Motion approved.

Hon. M. de Jong: I move that the bill be referred to a Committee of the Whole House for consideration at the next sitting after today.

Bill 8, Budget Measures Implementation Act, 2014, read a second time and referred to a Committee of the Whole House for consideration at the next sitting of the House after today.

Hon. M. de Jong: I call second reading of Bill 6, Provincial Capital Commission Dissolution Act.

BILL 6 — PROVINCIAL CAPITAL
COMMISSION DISSOLUTION ACT

Hon. C. Oakes: I move that Bill 6, entitled Provincial Capital Commission Dissolution Act, be read for the second time now.

I am pleased to move that the Provincial Capital Commission Dissolution Act be read for the second time. This legislation proposes to dissolve the Provincial Capital Commission and transfer its existing properties, assets, liabilities and staff to the provincial ministries except for the Belleville ferry terminal properties, which will be transferred to the B.C. Transportation Financing Authority, a Crown corporation under the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure.

[1130]

The commission has done an outstanding job connecting British Columbians to their capital through strong outreach programs and property management services. However, over the years government has evolved to the point where these services can now be provided within government.

This decision was made through the core review process. Core review is about managing wisely, eliminating overlap and finding efficiencies. Dissolution of the commission will support government efficiency by eliminating duplication and saving taxpayers money.

The decision to dissolve the Capital Commission will save provincial taxpayers approximately $1.5 million per
[ Page 1792 ]
year. The Ministry of Community, Sport and Cultural Development will deliver outreach cultural activities formerly provided by the commission. Shared Services British Columbia will provide the property management services formerly delivered by the commission, except for the Belleville ferry terminal properties.

As noted, the proposed legislation would provide specific authority to dissolve the Provincial Capital Commission, transfer the real property owned by the commission to the province of British Columbia and repeal the Capital Commission Act.

I want to recognize the commitment and hard work of everyone on the commission's board and staff. Government will ensure that the legacy of their work continues on behalf of all British Columbians.

I ask that all members lend their support to this piece of legislation.

R. Fleming: I rise to speak against Bill 6 and the dissolution of the Provincial Capital Commission for a number of reasons, and I will use the opportunity this morning to make some points as to why I have arrived at that opinion on this bill. I know that other members will undoubtedly want to enter into this debate too.

We've just heard the minister congratulate the Provincial Capital Commission, in introducing this bill, for doing an outstanding job. It's not often in government that you get the privilege of being shot at dawn for doing an outstanding job — in this case, promoting British Columbia, promoting the capital of British Columbia to citizens around the province of British Columbia, and doing an outstanding job of managing a complex inventory of capital assets, as indeed the minister credited the Provincial Capital Commission with doing.

I think the government should actually step back and reconsider this bill, especially at this time. In destroying the Provincial Capital Commission after five decades of its existence — since W.A.C. Bennett, the 25th Premier of British Columbia, created this entity…. In destroying it today, they have no new model to replace it.

The minister talked about this being an exercise that stems from the core review and that it will save the taxpayer money. That is an absurdity. The current model we have is a self-sustaining Crown corporation that in many fiscal years makes money for the treasury. So that argument doesn't hold water.

At a time when many British Columbians are being asked to do without by this government on a whole array of services that are desperately needed, some involving the most vulnerable kids in our province, as an example…. We've canvassed that in the House since we've come back into session. At a time when the government is trying to create an excuse of austerity in British Columbia, they're getting rid of a nice little earner for the province.

Where will those programs that the minister says will continue go, and where will they be paid from? Instead of being linked to assets that make revenues that cover the expenses for promoting British Columbia and all the visitation experience and all the other responsibilities that the commission has, those will now go to ministries where they will be just costs without revenues to offset those expenses. This will cost government — not a lot, but perhaps at $1½ million to $2½ million a year. It will go to that side of the ledger, from being a self-financing entity today. So I don't buy that excuse.

[1135]

This is an opportunity to also talk about what we may lose. What I think I lament most in government introducing this bill is that we will lose a small, nimble Crown entity that, on many occasions throughout its history, has proven itself to be a very nimble part of government that has an entrepreneurial ability to it.

The Provincial Capital Commission has concluded many land and property development agreements throughout its history, some of which are now so taken for granted, like the Inner Harbour redevelopment, that they're iconic parts of the provincial capital. Some now house civil servants in class A office space and were the best and highest use for property in the capital region and also the best deal for the taxpayer to house thousands of civil servants who do their work on behalf of citizens in British Columbia. That will be lost by liquidating assets and winding down the Provincial Capital Commission.

But let's be clear too. Why is this bill being offered in the here and now? On the surface of it, you could say that for the better part of 12 years — actually, since the last core review of government in 2003 — the B.C. Liberals simply haven't known what to do with the Provincial Capital Commission. They haven't had cabinet ministers here who are passionate about the capital region, who have any vision for the capital region, to advocate for that commission. It has languished, I think, and fallen back in terms of the political attention it deserves and the capacity and capabilities that it has.

They had a core review that rewrote the mandate of the PCC that removed many of the things that W.A.C. Bennett envisioned being our responsibility and that are common features of capital beautification commissions in other parts of the province and refocused it almost exclusively on education and festival programming. That's fine. I don't think it needed to be at the exclusion of its core mandate, but that's what they did.

They've never really known what to do with the appointees and with the corporation and to try and increase its potential to do good things here in the capital city on behalf of all British Columbians. Now today, with this bill, it's being introduced to die an unceremonious death. We will lose a great deal in terms of that loss.

Let me go back to the real intent, I think, that we understand here, behind the timing of this bill and its real purpose. Government announced in the last fis-
[ Page 1793 ]
cal year a two-year plan to put virtually everything on the market that government owns, to have a fire sale of assets right across B.C. Now, it just so happens that 70 to 75 percent of those assets…. They have failed to disclose adequately where and what properties are up for sale, but we do know that 70 to 75 percent of those assets are in the Lower Mainland or in the capital regional district.

This so-called balanced budget that government has requires approximately $450 million worth of property sales in this fiscal year, and it requires $200 million in property sales next year in order for it to be balanced. Now, the Provincial Capital Commission holds some of those assets in its portfolio.

This is a bill that clears the way and greases the skids for government to be able to put more property in the fire sale auction, and that's what the real intent of this bill is. They've run out of vision, but they also have an imperative to prop up their falsely balanced budget.

Think about that for a minute. Think about the fiscal principles behind liquidating the PCC and other government assets to balance a budget — to take things that were acquired over decades and sell them in one fiscal year to give the illusion of black ink. That is the antithesis of fiscal sustainability. That is a one-trick pony on the accounting sheet that you can do one time. You sell it; it's gone. This is happening without a debate or an argument from government that is compelling.

[1140]

This property asset sale is bigger than the entire contingency that has been set aside for government to account for the fluctuations that you normally get, based on the assumptions that you have to make to underpin a budget. More money is being counted on, on the revenue side from selling land that can be sold only this year and next and never again to try and give the illusion to balance the budget. I think this bill needs to be seen as part of that larger document that is the budget and that scheme that government has.

The minister didn't comment at the outset…. Maybe she'll use her opportunity in closing to speak about the anomaly of British Columbia. We're the only province right now that's tearing down its Capital Commission. We're going in the opposite direction of other provinces and capital cities in Canada and in North America.

In fact, it was a conservative government in Saskatchewan that, in this decade, created a brand-new capital commission, where one was lacking. They took what was called the Wascana improvement district and merged it with other provincial entities to create a robust and new capital commission in Regina.

Quebec City — and you can imagine the interpretation of history and the use of language and who the heroes are and all the things that they have to balance in Quebec City — created, under a Liberal government and with the previous support of a Parti Québécois government, a new capital commission. Both parties managed to transition the government and to agree that this would be a benefit to Quebec. In part, it was motivated because Quebec was about to celebrate 400 years as a city.

I can't help but note that we are about to celebrate 150 years as a country, in which the capital city of British Columbia will play an integral part to celebrate our joining of Confederation and being part of creating the nation of Canada. Those celebrations will take place here in Victoria, to a considerable extent, for all British Columbians to enjoy. And we will have no Capital Commission to contribute to the planning and work that needs to be done in 2017 to mark that commemoration.

What's interesting about the Provincial Capital Commission in this debate…. I mentioned earlier that the government had no vision and had done relatively little with the PCC over the last decade. I stand by that, although to their credit there have been a couple of things where the government has actually improved assets in recent times.

In 2006 the government looked at the Crystal Garden, which is an irreplaceable building of architectural significance to our young province. They looked at the seismic challenges and the risk of collapse of that building. There had been a blizzard that had actually threatened the structure of that roof. This government decided to make seismic upgrades to that building so that today it is seismically safe and is part of the convention centre capacity here in Victoria — 2006, government money being invested in PCC assets.

In 2012 we just completed the CPR Steamship Terminal investment — again, an iconic building on the Inner Harbour. I know I enjoyed the wax museum as a little kid, but it was time to change. It was time to bring back a signature piece on the Inner Harbour that is linked to a more comprehensive long-term redevelopment and one that has been championed and planned by the Provincial Capital Commission for decades. That piece was invested in with government money, and now it's on the for-sale block.

Something has happened here very recently to government. It's not a natural part of the evolution of the PCC, as I think the minister was trying to suggest — that all good things must come to an end. This is a fiscal imperative of the government to service a budget that is artificially balanced. That's why we're sacrificing an institution that's been built up over five decades, through governments of all stripes that have done incredible things.

I mentioned earlier that when you sell land, you can't go back. It's done. Future generations can't use it and contemplate the best and highest uses for those properties.

[1145]

I also mentioned in this debate that the PCC has had some golden moments where it has displayed entrepreneurial savvy and used property and leveraged private sector investment and achieved profits for the taxpayer, if you can believe that. It's a good thing. We're for that,
[ Page 1794 ]
on this side of the House.

One of those that I'm most familiar with and the Minister of Advanced Education would be most familiar with — and the Minister of Education, as well, because employees of that ministry work there — is St. Ann's Academy. You're talking about another piece of important history in our young province's evolution that was derelict and at risk of falling into the ground only 20 years ago. That project had potential, and it had definite established heritage value for the province.

The government across the way held a parking lot that I don't think you could say was beautiful or of strategic value to government, but it was nevertheless owned by the government. It was called the Y-lot.

Members of both sides of the House will know it today as a site that hosts the Marriott hotel and is now the site of two Concert Properties housing and retail investments that brought in hundreds of millions of dollars, created jobs and, most importantly, allowed government to upzone that property, realize wealth, preserve St. Ann's Academy and house civil servants who do important work providing services for all of us every day in class A office space at no cost to the taxpayer.

That is government at its entrepreneurial best. And that's the capacity that we're going to lose by liquidating the Provincial Capital Commission, taking all of its assets and selling them off.

There is no fiscal principle that the government has been able to defend in support of its own legislation on Bill 6 here thus far. I look forward to them advancing something, because we have been given nothing in terms of a real reason as to why the PCC, at this time, is being wound down and destroyed.

The other thing that the dissolution of the PCC creates in the capital region is greater uncertainty around an important strategic asset that was only given to the province about 15 years ago by Transport Canada. I'm referring to the Belleville terminal site. This is a property that is a major gateway to the Island. It brings in about 800,000 visitors a year currently. There are four international ferry terminal operators that use the Belleville terminal site. It was consolidated by the province in cooperation with the city and the federal government. It was done because the Provincial Capital Commission was seen as an honest broker and an entrepreneurial wing of government that would be able to accomplish the redevelopment that it needs.

It was indeed rezoned by the city of Victoria — I was a city councillor in 1999 — to give it the land purposes that were required for its redevelopment. Government changed in 2001, and absolutely nothing has happened on that site for 12 years. I know that the member for Victoria–Beacon Hill has made representations to this government time and time again on behalf of the business community, major tourism operators, hoteliers and everybody that has an interest in seeing that site redeveloped.

Nothing has happened except that it has grown more and more derelict. Now there is further uncertainty because government is dissolving the PCC to sell land — that's their purpose here — when that land was given to it and consolidated by the city and federal government for its redevelopment.

Government needs to explain in clear terms, since the dissolution of the PCC is connected to the land sales of this budget, what the future is of the Belleville international ferry terminal. They have not done that yet. There will be a degree of panic in the community from people who have significant investments and an economic interest in that ferry terminal until government sends the proper signal that it is now serious about its redevelopment.

[1150]

We don't need another blue-ribbon panel. Please, I would urge government not to do that. I would urge it to sit down with the business community and elected officials at the provincial, federal and city level to discuss its intentions on the Belleville international ferry terminal.

Now, I want to reiterate that amongst the several reasons to vote against the bill, I've already mentioned that I think the minister is wrong. The dissolution of the PCC is going to cost the taxpayer more in direct administration costs because it will sever it from revenues that supported those costs previously.

I think the dissolution of the PCC is also wrong because it will take the current governance model that involves local government…. They have a number of appointees they make, not the province, that balances out the governance of the PCC. It will eliminate local governments' input into the capital city, which both levels of government have a responsibility to steward well into the future.

I think this bill is wrong because it's really a fig leaf bill for a larger agenda of government, which is to sell assets and clear the way to take revenue from one-time land sales and put it into the operating budget of government.

Now, I expect the last minister responsible for the Provincial Capital Commission might want to reference the Point Hope Shipyard and the recent land sale that was announced by the province. I'd be interested to hear if she does care to make comments here on Hansard, on the record, about that.

I want to, for the record, commend the city of Victoria and the owners and management team of that shipyard for bringing the province to the table and concluding an agreement. I hope it's concluded quickly. They've certainly announced that agreement. It will create jobs. It will take a shipyard that represented considerable private sector risk a decade ago and has become a success…. There's a business plan that they feel will allow them to grow. This will be probably the only, that I can think of, private graving dock built in the entire country, at least for decades and decades.
[ Page 1795 ]

It is enabled by a city investment in rebuilding the Johnson Street Bridge, which connects the Old Island Highway and was done in partnership with the federal government — a $100 million project. It's a swing bridge that allows nautical traffic to continue up into the Inner Harbour of Victoria to support the shipbuilding industry that is at the Point Hope yard.

Interesting again. I don't know how much credit the minister or the provincial government will try and take, but not a single penny was put into the Johnson Street Bridge. Credit to the ratepayers of Victoria for taking something like 80 percent of the cost onto themselves, when they had an excellent case for the provincial government to be a significant partner. It seems that you have to bridge over the Fraser River to get this government's attention and money for infrastructure projects. They didn't participate at all in this project.

The cost is high — $100 million for a span that is not long — but it's because of the technology and the requirement to have either a lift bridge or a swing bridge as part of that infrastructure. It's allowing the expansion of the shipyard today.

What the provincial government didn't make known at the announcement was that they will be the owners of this property for about ten minutes. They'll say that they're an integral part of the deal, but in actual fact, their role in this deal is not to bring money or logistical support to make it happen; their role is taking money out of the deal. They're cashing out. That's their role in this deal.

Now, it's great that it's happening, but the credit has to go to the proponent and to the city of Victoria for dragging the provincial government to the table and not standing in the way. That's the best thing that this government can do. What we want to know — and I think at this stage of debate around Bill 66, we ought to know — is what government plans to do with the money that it's cashing out on for this parcel over at Point Hope Shipyard.

[1155]

Is it simply taking the money and going to run? Or does it have a plan for the proceeds of that land sale to address some of the other longstanding strategic investments that the Provincial Capital Commission has been focused on for recent decades?

[Madame Speaker in the chair.]

In other words, will there be some recognition that the sale of that property could help with the inertia that government has presided over on the Belleville international ferry terminal? And it should. It should, because the PCC, when it was at its entrepreneurial best, would take the proceeds of land sales and invest them in things that created jobs and further economic development opportunity. That's what can happen here.

I dismissed the government's blue-ribbon panel earlier — not because I didn't think the people who sat on it were sincere or good, but because they had a terms of reference that was so restrictive that it was a meaningless exercise. One thing they did acknowledge in their findings around Belleville was they said that this is a ferry terminal, a port of entry and an important gateway that can grow from 800,000 visitors a year to perhaps two million visitors per year.

If this government wants to, instead of liquidating assets to prop up a deficit in their budget, use the proceeds from land sales to make investments that will help create jobs and add to the GDP of the province and sustain a tourism industry that has so much potential, and further potential here on the south Island, then I'm willing to applaud it and maybe even willing to consider voting for this bill. But they've given no such indication of that.

Noting the time, I will reserve my right to speak after adjournment of the House and adjourn the debate.

R. Fleming moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

Committee of Supply (Section A), having reported progress, was granted leave to sit again.

Hon. T. Stone moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

Madame Speaker: This House stands adjourned until 1:30 this afternoon.

The House adjourned at 11:57 a.m.

PROCEEDINGS IN THE
DOUGLAS FIR ROOM

Committee of Supply

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF
ADVANCED EDUCATION

The House in Committee of Supply (Section A); M. Dalton in the chair.

The committee met at 11:03 a.m.

On Vote 13: ministry operations, $1,935,671,000.

The Chair: Minister, do you have any comments?

Hon. A. Virk: Yes, Mr. Chair, I do. First of all, it's indeed my honour to present the 2014-2015 spending esti-
[ Page 1796 ]
mates for the Ministry of Advanced Education.

Before I begin, I would like to introduce, first of all, my deputy, Sandra Carroll. Also with me I have three assistant deputy ministers. Over here I have Joe Thompson. Behind me is Claire Avison, and we have Bobbi Plecas as well. We have an executive director, as well, with us — Susan Brown.

British Columbia is indeed home to outstanding post-secondary educations that support excellent instruction and will support world-class research. I want to acknowledge the thousands and thousands of staff and faculty all across British Columbia at all the 25 public post-secondary institutions. It's their hard work that enables students to pursue their educational and career goals. They contribute to building healthy, prosperous families, communities and economies.

[1105]

Since becoming the Minister of Advanced Education, I have visited the main campus of all of our 25 public post-secondary institutions and many private institutions as well. I've met with parents. I've met with students. I've met with faculty, and I have met with staff. I'm quite impressed with the energy and the passion that they have for learning, the passion that the educators have for educating.

Education is a key to British Columbia's success in the knowledge-based global economy. All British Columbians deserve the opportunity to meet their educational and career goals, and investing in post-secondary education has been a priority for our government since 2001. Our resolve and our focus are unchanged. Our government remains committed to keeping post-secondary education affordable and accessible.

In 2014 and 2015 we are investing $1.8 billion for operating grants, a 44 percent increase since 2001. We are spending more than $750 million in capital investments over the next three years — investments in facilities such as the Emily Carr University of Art and Design's redevelopment project, Camosun College's centre for trades education and innovation, the trades training complex at Okanagan College. Since 2001 our government has invested more than $2.4 billion in more than 1,250 capital projects throughout the province.

More than 450,000 students will enrol this year in public post-secondary institutions. We are keeping that education affordable and accessible, with financial aid packages to suit their needs. B.C. offers a comprehensive package of financial assistance through student loans, grants, scholarships and repayment assistance programs.

Our undergrads in British Columbia pay the fourth-lowest tuition in all of Canada. It's cheaper than Ontario, Alberta, Saskatchewan, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and P.E.I. — more than $700 below the national average. Since 2005, tuition increases have remained capped at 2 percent, and that 2 percent increase is less than the national increase of 3.3 percent.

That's not all. In keeping education affordable. British Columbia was the first province in Canada — one of a few in North America and, may I say, one of a few in the world — to launch open textbook programs for 40 subject areas. An additional 20 open textbooks will be developed in skills training and technical post-secondary subject areas.

The throne speech identified the re-engineering of secondary and post-secondary education to ensure British Columbians are first in line for job opportunities. This goal is also reflected in the Premier's letter on my appointment as Minister of Advanced Education last year. I have asked institutions to work closely with industry partners to respond to what the labour markets need now and in the future.

We wish to ensure that British Columbia is the first in line for the one million jobs predicted by 2020. More than three-quarters of the jobs will require some form of post-secondary education, and some 43 percent are going to require some type of technical skills training. That's why it's so important to align education and training with in-demand occupations. We want to help students transition — I'm going to repeat that, transition — from learners to earners.

It's also important that aboriginal people…. They're, indeed, a better part of that equation. They're one of B.C.'s greatest assets. Ensuring aboriginal students access to more post-secondary education and training will be important in meeting B.C.'s labour market needs. It's another step in the path from learning to earning.

The world's economy is indeed changing. Careers are changing. Our educational system is changing. We face the challenge of filling a million jobs, and it's a wonderful challenge to have — to have more jobs than people, perhaps. It's also an opportunity for us to ensure that British Columbians are indeed first in line for those jobs.

That means re-engineering and rethinking the way we deliver our secondary and post-secondary education systems. We're doing that by being more strategic and being more innovative.

[1110]

I look forward to hearing all of your thoughts and answering all of your questions.

D. Eby: Thank you to my counterpart from the other side of the House for his comprehensive remarks. There are definitely a lot of issues that I hope we get into today.

Much like the minister, I've been visiting schools and teachers and students and administrators. I'd like very much to hear the minister's answers about why B.C. provides the lowest student financial aid of any province in Canada; why we charge the highest interest rate on student debt; why we have the most student debt, according to the Bank of Montreal, of any province in Canada; why we have the most young people out of work and school of any province in Canada, according to Statistics Canada;
[ Page 1797 ]
and then last but not least, why we hire the most temporary foreign workers of anywhere in Canada, double the national average.

I hope we can get to the answer of how the budget will address these problems for B.C.'s young people, especially in that critical 15- to 29-year-old demographic, as well as people who are out of work and want to get back into the workforce at a later age.

I'll keep my remarks to that. But that's where we are headed today, and I look forward to asking the minister questions. First I'd like to turn over the first set of questions to my colleague from Kootenay West.

K. Conroy: As my colleague has said, I represent Kootenay West, which has Selkirk College in our constituency. Selkirk College is one of the oldest community colleges in the province. It was the first community college. It was established 50 years ago, actually. Some of the same building is still there, 50 years later, with very little renovation done to it. It's an excellent college. It has been providing services for many different programs all those years.

One of the first ones I wanted to talk about was the aviation program. The aviation program at Selkirk College is world-renowned. It's actually one of the best programs, definitely, in B.C. It's known across the country for its excellence in teaching. There are pilots from all over the world who were trained at Selkirk College. If you've ever flown into Castlegar, you will know it's one of the most difficult airports to fly into in the province. People that are trained to fly and learn to fly at Selkirk College, at our airport, are excellent pilots.

Air Canada — some of the top people in their administration are originally Selkirk College pilots; as well, other airlines across the world. They have alumni every year coming back and talking about what a great experience they had learning at Selkirk.

The sad fact is the aviation program at Selkirk is dwindling. This is mainly due to other programs in the province that are being allowed to flourish with minimal standards. Selkirk continues to have some of the highest standards, and other programs in the province don't.

I am wondering if the ministry is going to be looking at these other programs where other universities, colleges, might have an aviation program but they contract out the work, so they don't have their own staff actually teaching, and if there's going to be any kind of implementing of some kind of regulation to ensure that we are really training pilots to be the best they can be in this province.

We know that the students that come out of Selkirk are the best they can be. Right now the program is struggling because, I guess I could say, the students are preferring to go to perhaps a cheaper model of training.

[1115]

Hon. A. Virk: First of all, thank you very much to the member for Kootenay West for the question. Indeed, Selkirk College is a wonderful facility. It is very interesting to land in Castlegar. It's a wonderful community, a wonderful campus — the location that it's perched on. I do agree with you. It's very nice that we do have agreement, that you acknowledge that Selkirk is an excellent facility as part of our post-secondary system.

The grants that are provided by the hard-paying taxpayer of British Columbia to Selkirk College have increased substantially, have increased almost $5 million — $4.9 million or 23 percent from 2001-2013. So just a broader picture on that.

In respect to the aviation program, the institution's decision to suspend the program was based upon a number of factors, including the fact that just too few students were interested in taking the program in that location. It's a fact-based decision.

I understand that the review is being undertaken by Selkirk College, as we speak, to do a full examination of all the factors in terms of why they have too few students, looking at their program and with examination, coming back with an updated and renewed program.

In the broader context in terms of standards, Transport Canada sets the standards across the aviation industry in British Columbia. The same rigorous standards are set by Transport Canada across the province for all aviation programs.

K. Conroy: Even though this is the oldest and most respected program in the province, my understanding, then, is there will not be any further funding to help ensure that that program continues as we know it now. That's unfortunate.

Actually, the minister included a long series of years there, for what he termed as increases to the college. The college has actually been cut the last couple of years. They face a $900,000 deficit this year, and they are looking at ways to deal with it.

They are told that it needs to come out of administrative reduction and elimination of redundancies. But this is a college that has pretty much cut to the bone, and there are no redundancies, so to speak. The administration is very streamlined.

Eventually, it comes back to cuts to students and programs. You can say that there's been this much money put in over this many years, but when you look at it, in the last two years there were actually cuts to Selkirk College.

It's increasingly frustrating for the administration to try to ensure that they can provide the services in our region. We have a huge geographical region. We don't have one nice, compact little campus. We have campuses that cover the entire region in the West Kootenay, which is what we need to do to ensure students in our region get the post-secondary education that they should be getting, as the minister says that all students should have access to it. So it has to be spread out over the region.
[ Page 1798 ]

Now they are facing a $900,000 deficit. I'm wondering what the minister is going to do, where it is in the budget that they can help these programs. He is saying there are increases, but obviously there's some miscommunication, because there were no increases to Selkirk this year.

[1120]

Hon. A. Virk: Mr. Chair, I believe that it requires clarification in terms of some of the suggestions that the member for Kootenay West is suggesting. First of all, the administrative service delivery transformation initiative, as outlined in Budget 2013, targets savings of some $5 million in 2013-14, $25 million in 2014-2015 and $50 million in 2014-2015. That's a reduction of grants by some 2.7 percent over three years.

[1125]

Let me explain the administrative service transformation initiative. Led by this sector, it's targeted reductions that are achieved to sector collaboration on things like information technology initiatives, shared procurement, shared software. Isn't it wonderful to suggest that we should take the taxpayers' dollar, take that one dollar from British Columbians, and have universities do shared procurement to buy paper, computers, all those things together, to save the taxpayer, to buy the best bang for the dollar? Those are savings that the sectors can do and are doing.

K. Conroy: I would suggest we're already doing that in the Kootenays. Because we're in the Kootenays, we're far away from the main body of things that happen down here on the coast, so that's already happening. Usually transformation is a positive thing, but I think that we need to rethink that word.

Also, taxpayers want to see an investment in post-secondary education. They want to see young people get a good post-secondary education so they can go on to get jobs in this province. I think that's what taxpayers would like to see.

One of the good things that's happened at Selkirk is the rural pre-med program, which is a wonderful program that's starting up in the fall. It will actually give opportunity for people from our area, a chance, to start off in medicine and get a taste of what it's like to work in medicine in rural B.C. We think it's a wonderful program. We are very excited about it. Selkirk has already had numerous people signing up to do the program as well as requesting information on it, so it's a really positive thing for our region. I'm hoping that the minister supports it as much as everybody in the region does.

I also wanted to talk, just before I'm finished, a little bit about the fact that Selkirk College is 50 years old — and the infrastructure. The minister did mention that there are some other facilities in the province that are getting funding for infrastructure, and I think it's important to point out that Selkirk is the oldest facility in the entire province. It does need some work done to it, as far as community colleges go. There's a huge program that's being planned, and it will benefit all students.

It'll benefit the region, and the region is very much behind this program of renovation, but I think that the college also is hoping there is support from the government as well. In all of the campuses across the region there is need for renovation, but I'm speaking primarily about the main campus in Castlegar, which is in my constituency. There are significant renovations that need to be made, and the college is putting together an excellent proposal.

I'm hoping that the minister will see his way fit to acknowledge that not only are the programs needing renovations, of the ones that have been mentioned, but also those facilities in the Kootenays and rural B.C. Especially in the Selkirk College area, we also need some funds to support the renovations, and I'm hoping the minister has looked into it and will support those renovations.

[1130]

Hon. A. Virk: I do really want to thank the member for Kootenay West again for her passion for the local college and acknowledging some of the great things that are occurring there. I think we share some commonality. The rural pre-med program that the member for Kootenay West spoke about is an example of the re-engineering of post-secondary education in British Columbia — the right training at the right time for the right place. Train individuals and students as close as possible to where we want them to work.

It's indeed a partnership, where you can have Selkirk College in partnership with UBC medical school to provide some of that preliminary training right close to home, to hope to draw those doctors right back to home. Thank you for acknowledging that. It is indeed part of the re-engineering of how we do post-secondary education.

In terms of capital, there has been some $13.4 million from the Ministry of Advanced Education, since 2001, that has gone towards renewal at that campus. Specifically, there is some $2.3 million for routine capital projects that address life, safety, health and environmental risks. The prioritization is on health and safety first.

As additional projects…. I look forward to the capital requests that come from Selkirk and every other college and institution across British Columbia, to be able to prioritize all those projects appropriately.

I'll give you an example of some of the things, some of the renewal that has already gone into the Castlegar campus: a low-efficiency boiler with a hybrid heating system that reduces energy costs. That's at the main campus, Mary Hall, replacing two 48-year-old boilers. Indeed, we acknowledge that they were 48 years old. They were replaced. That was a cost of $1.27 million, a part of the renewal refreshing that facility.
[ Page 1799 ]

M. Mungall: My question is about the trades campus in Nelson for Selkirk College. Silver King campus has been in Nelson since the 1960s and hasn't seen many upgrades since that time. As I'm sure the minister would know, we'd welcome a visit from him any time to see for himself the fact that the campus desperately needs some renovation.

The school has a renovation plan to refurbish and to also bring in new equipment. When the government announced several of its capital projects for post-secondary education, I did not see the trades campus for Selkirk College in Nelson in the mix. I'm wondering if the minister can say where that is in the lineup.

[1135]

Hon. A. Virk: I thank the member for Nelson-Creston for the question and for the invitation to go to the Nelson campus.

Actually, I was standing in the Nelson campus with the president, Angus Graeme, in the trades facility. Perhaps they hadn't followed my schedule around the province.

As I was standing at the campus in Nelson, in the trades facility, talking to the president of that college, he had a personal conversation with me about the plan they wished to propose, in terms of some renewal and/or capital request for that campus.

In fact, some of the members of the board of governors were with me also at the Nelson campus on that very same day. I look forward to a second visit, and the invitation is appreciated.

That has been submitted to AVED, and it's being reviewed as part of our capital program for this year.

M. Mungall: Well, the next time the minister travels through Nelson-Creston, I hope that he'll put partisanship aside and, despite us being on opposite sides of the House, let the local MLA know that he's in the area so that we can be a part of that and then follow up with him on any of the requests made or the presentations made by our local institutions. I'm sure that he would very much appreciate doing that, as members on this side of the House are certainly able to put partisanship aside for the benefit of our post-secondary institutions in our own ridings.

On that, the minister said that they are currently reviewing it. I'm wondering, though, for the benefit of people in Nelson and for the entire West Kootenays, students who are looking to study trades at the Nelson campus: how far along are they with that review?

[1140]

Hon. A. Virk: As one would have seen from the budget, there is, over the next three years, $750 million committed out of my ministry's budget for renewal, refreshment and rebuilding of facilities all across British Columbia. All institutions are submitting their priorities for review by the ministry, including Selkirk College. It has submitted for review.

What I can say is that those submissions that align with labour market needs — and, specifically, trades and technical training — are areas that I'm looking at, indeed, for higher priority as those submissions are coming forth.

D. Routley: I'd like to ask the minister some questions, beginning with questions related to per-student funding levels. I wonder if the minister could tell me, in trades training in our public colleges, what the per-student budget is at this moment.

[1145]

Hon. A. Virk: I'd like to thank the member for Nanaimo–North Cowichan for the question. The average funding per FTE, full-time-equivalent, is $9,904. Institutions make programming decisions based upon local labour market needs.

I do have to point out that the FTE funding is up some 17.3 percent since 2001. The funding is on a block basis, not trade-specific. The trade-specific funding comes from the ITA, which is the purview of the Minister of Jobs, Tourism and Skills Training.

D. Routley: According to the minister, we've seen a 17 percent increase in per-student funding. My understanding from other sources has been that the per-student funding essentially hasn't risen in the past 12 years in fact.

But if we take the minister's numbers as being correct — and I'm going to assume that they are — then 17 percent over that period of time equates to an amount considerably below the inflation rate, generally, and considerably below the inflationary costs of institutions when you consider the contract obligations that institutions have had to meet and the requirements that the government has placed on training programs.

So what we've seen around the province has been many cases where institutions have shortened the length of programs in order to meet budgetary constraints. I wonder if the minister can reflect on those facts and offer his opinion as to the impact that this underfunding has on the ability of colleges to deliver comprehensive programming to the standard that they have in the past.

In fact, the increases, if there are any, to trades per-student funding have not met inflationary costs. Institutions have had to downgrade their programming, shorten the length of programs. Does the minister agree that this would imperil the quality of training?

[1150]

Hon. A. Virk: I believe it's important to acknowledge the broadest of pictures as well as…. Taxpayers are investing, in 2014-2015, some $1.8 billion in operating grants to support post-secondary education across British Columbia. Operating grants, if you want to do
[ Page 1800 ]
that comparison, have increased, since 2001, $552 million. That's an increase of 44 percent. But it's important to keep the highest level of quality, the highest quality of education.

Let me talk about the apprenticeship programs. First of all, the specific rules are set by the ITA, but our focus is to maintain incredible quality, world-class quality, and that's through innovative ways to deliver that program.

Let me give you an example of one of the innovative ways: Thompson Rivers University's front-end-loading program. You have students recruited by industry and university together. Their toolboxes are delivered to the institution by industry. In a front-end-loading program, which is a deviation from programs in the past, the training is done all at one time, and then these students go from a learner to an earner, with their toolbox, right to their employer. All their training is done at the same time. This is an example of re-engineering education, being innovative and being a little bit flexible to get that learner to become an earner that much faster.

Hon. Chair, I move that the committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again.

Motion approved.

The committee rose at 11:53 a.m.

[ Return to: Legislative Assembly Home Page ]

Hansard Services publishes transcripts both in print and on the Internet.
Chamber debates are broadcast on television and webcast on the Internet.
Question Period podcasts are available on the Internet.

TV channel guide • Broadcast schedule

Copyright © 2014: British Columbia Hansard Services, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada